66 Permission to Use All Languages in Synagogue, and Prohibition of Sadducean Opinions and of the MishnaJustinian
8 February 553
This law, given by Justinian at Constantinople on 8 February 553, was addressed to Areobindus, Praefectus Praetorio of the East.
It was drafted by the Quaestor Constantine (see Honoré, pp. 240242). Its Greek text has been preserved in the Collection of 168 Novels, the Basilica, and in the epitomes of Theodorus and Athanasius. A very corrupt Latin translation which misses the final part of the text has been preserved in the Authenticum, The legislator claimed that he was asked to take action because of serious disputes between Jews concerning the use of languages in the synagogal worship, whether Hebrew alone was to be used or Greek as well. Our law enunciated the following measures:(A) Entire freedom to choose any language for liturgical use.
(B) Synagogal reading in Greek must be made either from the Septuagint or from Akilas’ translation.
(C) The Jewish authorities were forbbiden to act in defiance of the principle of the freedom of language under threat of corporal and pecuniary punishment.
(D) Prohibition of the Mishna.
(E) Prohibiton of Sadducean opinions concerning the Resurrection, the Last Judgment and the Creation of Angels.
(F) Imposition of corporal punishments, property confiscation and banishment on those convicted for breaking this law.
This general law testifies to the tensions generated within the Jewish communities concerning the use of other languages than Hebrew in the synagogal office.
Although it does not distinguish clearly between the principal language used in reading the portion of the Scriptures and the secondary language used in translating the portion, in its Greek version it seems to indicate that those who advocated the use of Greek in addition to Hebrew were opposed by partisans of Hebrew as an exclusive liturgical language. The Latin text, on the other hand, seems to suggest—particularly in its rubric—that the use of languages other than Hebrew was already a well-established tradition. This is supported by the ha- lachic sources as well. In the present state of our knowledge, therefore, we are not in position to determine categorically whether the disputes that occasioned Justinian’s intervention centered on the exclusivity of Hebrew or of Greek, or on the right to use other languages in addition to Hebrew.1 It is equally doubtful who initiated this controversy. Juster suggested that it was the advocates of the use of Greek, who attempted to replace Hebrew by Greek as liturgical language, while Colorni attributed the initiative to the promoters of Hebrew, whose demands to abolish Greek as liturgical language form one element in the Hebrew “National” Revival of the sixth century.Justinian exploited the occasion in order to intervene and direct the Jews towards a Biblical exegesis that accorded with the Christian tradition. This idea inspired his demand that the Scriptures should be understood by the whole community, his preference of the Septuagint as obligatory text for the Greek reading, and his prohibition of “Sadducean opinions” which contradicted the major tenets of Christian dogma. The same motivation inspired his interdiction of the Mishna, which he condemned, in accord with the well-known patristic usage, as an entirely human tradition, devoid of any Divine inspiration, origin or authority, and contrary to Christian faith. This interdiction may have been occasioned by the specific context of the synagogue’s worship, for preachers and commentators in the synagogues used to refer to post-Biblical themes and quotations with the words “The Sages have taught” (pnn *011,tP)33n *DW).
The interdiction of the Mishna in its present formulation, however, does not apply to the use of the Mishna in the context of the synagogue only, and should be seen as a total interdiction of the beuTepwoig (secunda editio).Latin is specifically mentioned among the languages permitted for use in synagogues, and Justinian designated it as “our ancestral language,” another instance of his oft-repeated claim to Roman ancestry. See also Novels 7 and 15 from 535, Schol-Kroll edition, pp. 52, 109.
Several Jewish sources testify to the practical application of this law, mainly in Palestine. R. Yehudai Gaon refers to various prohibitions imposed by the Byzantine authorities in Palestine on the study of the Torah and on preaching in synagogue. These prohibitions are commonly seen as the direct cause of the evolution of several poetical genres, such as the Krova and the Yotzer. A later Western Rabbinical authority adds to this Gaonic source the following comment: “And we have also heard that the wicked government decreed that they shall not read the Torah and shall not translate, and that the sages of that generation decided that the entire Psalm mY OVn ‘pjn (Ps. XX) should be read, and to say m 5x HT Klpl (Is. VI:3) and mi ■’JKIWTl (Ez. 111:12) ( = Kedu- sha) and to translate them.”2
A. Dotan proposed to read the Ein-Geddi synagogue mosaic inscription in the light of the present law, as a threat to those members of the community who shall reveal to the authorities the “secret of the reading,” i.e., the practice of the local community in reading the Torah. This suggestion implies reading there instead of ΠΠΊρΤ, a substantial correction that has been categorically rejected by D. Barag.
We have no reason to believe that the law was applied in the Byzantine West.
The Ahimaaz Scroll, in effect, testifies to the practice of the communities in the diaspora of having a Sabbath reading and preaching in Hebrew accompanied by translations in Greek, which was the better known language.3Novellae, No. 146, ed. Scholl & Kroll, pp. 714-718
ΠΕΡΙ ΕΒΡΑΙΩΝ
Ό αύτός βασιλεύς Άρεοβίνδω* τω ένδοξοτάτω έπάρχω πραιτωρίων
5 Έχρήν μέν Εβραίους των ιερών άκούοντας βιβλίων μή ψιλοίς προστετηκέναι τοίς γράμμασιν, άλλα προς τάς έναποκειμένας αύτοίς προφητείας όραν, δί ών τον μέγαν θεόν καί σωτήρα τού των άνθρώπων γένους Ίησοΰν τον Χριστόν καταγγέλλουσι· πλήν άλλ’ εί καί άλόγοις σφάς αύτούς έρμηνείαις έπιδιδόντες της όρθής άχρι καί νυν ά- ιο ποπεπλάνηνται δόξης, δμως άμφισβητείν προς άλλήλους μαθόντες αύτούς ούκ έκαρτερήσαμεν άκριτον αύτοίς καταλιπείν ταραχήν.
Δι’ αύτών γάρ των προσενηνεγμένων ήμίν προσελεύσεων* έμάθομεν, ώς οί μέν μόνης έχονται της έβραΐδος φωνής καί αύτή κεχρήσθαι περί τήν των ίερών βιβλίων άνάγνωσιν βούλονται, οί δέ καί τήν έλληνίδα 15 παραλαμβάνειν άξιοΰσι, καί πολύν ήδη χρόνον ύπέρ τούτου προς σφάς αύτούς στασιάζουσιν.Ημείς τοίνυν τά περί τούτου μαθόντες καλλίους έκρίναμεν είναι τούς καί τήν έλληνίδα φωνήν προς τήν των ίερών βιβλίων άνάγνωσιν παραλαμβάνειν έθέλοντας, καί φωνήν πάσαν άπλώς ήν ό τόπος έπιτηδειοτέραν καί μάλλον γνώριμον τοίς 20 άκούουσιν είναι ποιεί.Caput I
Θεσπίζομεν τοίνυν, άδειαν είναι τοίς βουλομένοις Έβραίοις κατά τάς συναγωγάς τάς αύτών, καθ’ δν Εβραίοι δλως τόπον είσί, διά τής έλ- ληνίδος φωνής τάς ίεράς βίβλους άναγινώσκειν τοίς συνιούσιν, ή καί 25 τής πατρίου τυχόν (τής ιταλικής ταύτης φαμέν) ή καί τών άλλων άπλώς, τοίς τόποις συμμεταβαλλομένης τής γλώττης καί τής δί αύτής άναγνώσεως, έφ’ ώ σαφή τε είναι τά λεγόμενα τοίς συνιούσιν άπασιν έφεξής καί κατά τα αύτά ζην τε καί πολιτεύεσθαι· καί μή παρρησίαν είναι τοις παβ αυτοΐς έξηγηταΐς μόνην την έβραΐδα παραλαμβάνουσι 30 κακουργεϊν ταύτην ώς άν έθελήσαιεν, τη τών πολλών άγνοια την σφών αύτών περικαλύπτοντες κακοήθειαν.
Πλήν οί διά τής έλληνίδος ά- ναγινώσκοντες τη τών έβδομήκοντα χρήσονται παραδόσει τή πάντων άκριβεστέρφ καί παρά τάς άλλας έγκεκριμένη διά τό μάλιστα περί την έρμηνείαν συμβεβηκός, δτι κατά δύο διαιρεθέντες καί κατά διαφόρους 35 έρμηνεύσαντες τόπους όμως μίαν άπαντες έκδεδώκασι σύνθεσιν. Πρός δέ γε τούτοις τις ούκ άν τών άνδρών κάκεϊνο θαυμάσειεν, δτι πολλώ πρεσβύτεροι τής σωτηριώδους έπιφανείας τού μεγάλου θεού καί σωτήρος ήμών ’Ιησού Χριστού γεγονότες δμως έκείνην μέλλουσαν ώσπερ όρωντες τήν τών ιερών βίβλων παράδοσιν έποιήσαντο, 40 προφητικής ώσπερ χάριτος περιλαμψάσης αύτούς; καί ταύτη μέν χρήσονται μάλιστα πάντες· πλήν άλλ’ ώς άν μή τας λοιπός αύτοΐς ά- ποκλείειν νομισθείημεν έρμηνείας, άδειαν δίδομεν καί τή Άκύλου κεχ- ρήσθαι, κάν εί άλλόφυλος* έκεΐνος καί ού μέτριαν έπί τινων λέξεων έχ- η πρός τούς έβδομήκοντα τήν διαφωνίαν. Τήν δέ παρ’ αύτοΐς 45 λεγομένην δευτέρωσιν άπαγορεύομεν παντελώς, ώς ταΐς μέν ίεραΐς ού συνανειλημμένην βίβλοις ούδέ άνωθεν παραδεδομένην έκ τών προφητών, έξεύρεσιν δέ ούσαν άνδρών έκ μόνης λαλούντων τής γής καί θειον έν αύτοΐς έχόντων ούδέν. Καί αύτάς δέ δή τας ίεράς φωνάς ά- ναγνώσονται τάς βίβλους αύτάς άναπτύσσοντες,* άλλά μή κατακρύπ- 50 τοντες μέν τά κατ’ αύτάς είρημένα, τάς έξωθεν δέ παραλαμβάνοντες άγράφους κενοφωνίας πρός τήν τών άπλουστέρων αύτοΐς έ- πινενοημένας άπώλειαν. Ώστε ταύτης δεδομένης παρ’ ήμών τής άδειας ούτε ξημίαις τισίν ύπαχθήσονται παντελώς οί τήν έλληνίδα φωνήν καί τάς άλλας παραλαμβάνοντες, ούτε παρ’ ούτινοσούν 55 κωλυθήσονταυ ούδέ άδειαν έξουσιν οί παρ’ αύτοΐς άρχιφερεκϊται ή πρεσβύτεροι τυχόν ή διδάσκαλοι προσαγορευόμενοι περινοίαις τισίν ή άναθεματισμοϊς τούτο κωλύειν, πλήν εί μή βούλοιντο δι’ αύτών σωφρονιζόμενοι τών εις σώμα ποινών καί πρός γε άφαιρούμενοι τών ούσιών άκοντες ένδιδόναι κάλλιονά τε καί θεοφιλέστερα βουλομένοις 60 τε ήμϊν καί κελεύουσιν.Caput II
Εΐ τινες δέ παρ’ αύτοΐς κενοφωνίας άθεους έπεισάγειν έγχειρήσαιεν, ή άνάστασιν ή κρίσιν άρνούμενοι ή τό ποίημα τού θεού καί κτίσμα τούς άγγέλους ύπάρχειν, τούτους καί άπελαύνεσθαι βουλόμεθα τόπου παντός καί μή άφιέναι φωνήν βλάσφημον οΰτω καί αύτής τής περί θεού καθάπαξ έξολισθήσασαν γνώσεως έγχειρούντας γάρ αύτούς παραφθέγγεσθαί τι τοιούτον ταΐς πασών έσχάταις ύποβάλλομεν τιμωρίαις, τής έπεισαγομένης πλάνης έκ τούτου το των Εβραίων περικαθαίροντες έθνος.
class=21 style='text-indent:18.0pt;line-height:normal'>Caput IIIΕύχόμεθα δέ αύτούς διά ταύτης ή έκείνης τής γλώττης των ιερών βίβλων άκούοντας φυλάττεσθαι μέν τήν τών έρμηνευόντων κακίαν, μή ψιλοίς δέ προσέχειν τοϊς γράμμασιν, άλλα τών πραγμάτων γενέσθαι καί θειοτέρας όντως έννοιας λαβείν, ώστε καί μεταμανθάνειν το κάλλιαν καί παύσασθαί ποτέ πλανωμένους καί περί αύτό το πάντων καιριώτατον άμαρτάνοντας, τήν εις θεόν έλπίδα φαμέν. Διά τούτο γάρ δή πάσαν αύτοΐς φωνήν άνεώξαμεν προς τήν τών ιερών βίβλων ά- νάγνωσιν, ώστε πάντας έφεξής τήν αύτών λαμβάνοντας εϊδησιν εύ- μαθεστέρους πρός τά καλλίω γενέσθαι· τών ώμολογημένων ύπάρ- χοντος, έτοιμότερον πολλω προς διάκρισιν είναι καί πρός τήν τού βελτίονος αίρεσιν τον έν ίεραΐς έντραφέντα βίβλοις καί μικρόν το λειπον έχοντα πρός διόρθωσιν, ή τόν είδότα μέν τούτων ούδέν, μόνου δέ τού της θρησκείας έξηρτημένον όνόματος καί ώσπερ άγκυρας άντεχόμενον ίερας καί μάθημα θειον τήν ψιλήν τής αίρέσεως προσηγορίαν είναι νομίζοντα.*
Τά τοίνυν παραστάντα ήμΐν καί διά τούδε τού θείου νόμου δηλούμενα παραφυλάξει μέν ή σή ένδοξότης καί ή πειθομένη σοι τάξις, παραφυλάξει δέ ό κατά καιρόν έπί τής αύτής άρχής ταχθησόμενος, καί ού συγχωρήσει παντελώς Έβραίοις παρά ταύτα ποιείν, άλλά τούς ένισταμέ- νους ή καί κωλύειν δλως έπιχειρούντας ταΐς εις σώμα πρώτον ποιναΐς ύποθείς έξορίαν οίκείν άναγκάσει, άφαιρουμένους καί τών ούσιών, ώς μή κατά ταύτόν αύτούς θεού τε καί βασιλείας καταθρασύνεσθαι. Χρήση δέ καί προστάξεσι πρός τούς τών έπαρχιών ήγουμένους προτάττων αύτών τόν ήμέτερον νόμον, ώστε καί αύτούς τούτον μανθά- νοντας προθέιναι κατά πόλιν έκάστην, είδότας ώς ταύτα παραφυλάτ- τειν χρεών ήμετέραν άγανάκτησιν δεδιότας.
DAT. VI. ID. FEBR. CP. IMP. DN. IUSTINIANI PP. AUG. ANNO XXVI. PC.
BASILI! VC. ANNO XII.·
ON THE HEBREWS.
THE SAME AUGUSTUS TO AREOBINDUS,4 THE MOST GLORIOUS PRAEFECTUS PRAETORIO (Preamble)
It was right and proper that the Hebrews, when listening to the Holy Books, should not adhere to the literal writings but look for the prophecies contained in them, through which they announce the Great God and the Saviour of the human race, Jesus Christ. However, although they have erred from the right doctrine till today, given as they are to senseless interpretations, when we learnt that they dispute among themselves we coul^l not bear to leave them with an unresolved controversy. We have learnt from their petitions,5 which they have addressed to us, that while some maintain the Hebrew language only and want to use it in reading the Holy Books others consider it right to admit Greek as well, and they have already been quarreling among themselves about this for a long time. Having therefore studied this matter we decided that the better case is that of those who want to use also Greek in reading the Holy Books, and generally in any language that is the more suited and the better known to the hearers in each locality.
Chapter 1.
We decree, therefore, that it shall be permitted to those Hebrews who want it to read the Holy Books in their synagogues and, in general, in any place where there are Hebrews, in the Greek language before those assembled and comprehending, or possibly in our ancestral language (we speak of the Italian language), or simply in all the other languages, changing language and reading according to the different places; and that through this reading the matters read shall become clear to all those assembled and comprehending, and that they shall live and act according to them. We also order that there shall be no license to the commentators they have, who employ the Hebrew language to falsify it at their will, covering their own malignity by the ignorance of the many. Furthermore, those who read in Greek shall use the Septuagint tradition, which is more accurate than all the others, and is preferable to the others particularly in reason of what happened while the translation was made, that although they divided by twos, and though they translated in different places, nevertheless they presented one version. Apart from these, who will not be amazed by this thing about these men, who lived a long time before the saving revelation of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ yet carried out the translation of the Holy Books as if they saw that this revelation was to happen in future, and as if illuminated by a prophetic grace? Let all use mainly this translation; but in order that we shall not appear to prohibit them all the other translations, we give permission to use also Aki- las’ translation, although he was gentile6 and in some readings differs not a little from the Septuagint. What they call Mishnah, on the other hand, we prohibit entirely, for it is not included among the Holy Books, nor was it handed down from above by the prophets, but it is an invention of men in their chatter, exclusively of earthly origin and having in it nothing of the divine. Let them read the holy words themselves, therefore, in unfolding7 these Holy Books for reading, but without hiding what is said in them, on the one hand, and without accepting extraneous and unwritten nonsense they themselves had contrived to the perdition of the more simple minded, on the other hand. In consequence of this permission granted by us, those who adopt the Greek language and the other languages shall not be subjected to any penalty at all, neither shall they be hindered by any person, nor shall those who are called among them Archipherekitae,8 or possibly Presbyters or Didascaloi, have the license to hinder them from this by any deceits or excommunications, unless they would wish to be chastened for these deeds by corporal punishments as well as by loss of property, and obey us—who desire and command deeds better and more pleasing to God—against their will.
Chapter 2.
And if there are some people among them who shall attempt to introduce ungodly nonsense, denying either the resurrection or the last judgment or that the angels exist as God’s work and creation, we want these people expelled from all places, and that no word of blasphemy of this kind and absolutely erring from that knowledge of God shall be spoken. We impose the harshest punishments on those attempting to utter such a nonsense, completely purifying in this way the nation of the Hebrews from the error introduced into it. Chapter 3.
We pray that they shall avoid the evil of the commentators when they hear the Holy Books in one language or another, and that they shall not turn to the naked letter but perceive the reality and grasp the more divine sense, in order that they shall study better what is more beautiful and cease at some time to err and to sin in what is vital above anything else, we speak about the hope in God. For this reason we opened before them all the languages to read the Holy Books, that when all shall acquire knowledge of them they shall become readier to learn the better matters. It is commonly agreed, that one raised up on the Holy Books is far readier to discern and to choose what is better—and but little is wanting for his amendment— than he who does not understand a thing in them but clings to only the name of religion as though held by holy anchors and believes that God’s doctrine is but the name of heresy.9
(Epilogue)
Your Glory, and the service obedient to you, shall entirely observe the matters conceived by us and promulgated in this divine law, and it shall be observed by him who will be appointed in time to this office, and he shall absolutely not allow the Hebrews to act against these matters, but impose on those resisting them or attempting to prevent them altogether firstly corporal punishments and confiscation of property, and then he shall force them to live in banishment, lest they defy in this matter God and Empire. He shall also promulgate in proclamations to the governors of provinces, imposing on them our law, in order that they too shall study it and promulgate it in every city, knowing that it is necessary to observe these matters fully, and fearing our vexation.
GIVEN ON THE SIXTH DAY BEFORE THE IDES OF FEBRUARY AT CONSTANTINOPLE, IN THE TWENTY-SIXTH YEAR OF EMPEROR LORD JUSTINIAN, AUGUSTUS FOREVER, IN THE TWELFTH YEAR AFTER THE CONSULATE OF THE ILLUSTRIOUS BASILIUS.10
NOTES
1. See Colorni for a selective and rich bibliography on this subject.
2. See Halberschtam.
3. See the affair of R. Silano, as recounted in Megillat Ahimaaz, ed. B. Klaar, Jerusalem 1973/74, p. 16.
4. Areobindus was Praefectus Praetorio of the East from late 552 until 15 April 554. See Stein, II, p. 786.
5. Petition: the meaning of προσελεύσις in late Greek is “a request, or a petition, presented to the emperor.” See Socrates, 'Εκκλησιαστική ιστορία, 3:25, ed. H. Valesius, PG, LXVII, Col. 452.
6. Gentile frequently designated the Philistines in the Septuagint translation; hence its use to indicate non-Jews, as in the present law.
7. “Unfolding” appears here in its original meaning, but the legislator was certainly aware of the added sense of “thinking,” “considering.” Compare the use of this term by Johannes Chrysostomus: “Μή γάρ έπειδή £ήμα έστι βραχύ, τό ’Οικοδομήσω μου τήν έκκλησίαν, παραδράμης απλώς άλλα άνάπτυξον τη διανοίρ, καί έννόησον. “Do not skip simply the saying Ί shall build my Church’ because it is short, but consider and think, etc.” See Πρός τε Ιουδαίους καί Ελληνας άπόδειξις, 12, ed. Β. de Montfaucon & G. R. L. von Sinner, PG, XLVIII, Col. 829.
8. The office of Archipherekitae, and the powers vested in it, are still very obscure. According to Seder Olam Zuta, Mar Zutra III was appointed Resh Pirka in Palestine, probably Head of the Tiberiade Sanhedrin, in 520. See J. Guttmann, Encyclopaedia Judaica, Berlin 1929, III, s.v. Archipherekites, Cols. 213-214. The text of Midrash Debarim R. 4:8, which referred to appointment of a Resh-Pirka in the diaspora by Sages sent from Palestine to collect the Sages Contribution indicates that this was sometimes a merely honourary title.
9. Heresy: Justinian might have had in mind the common use of the term μάθημα to indicate astrology and magics. Compare Origenes, Κατά πασών αίρεσεών έλεγχος, IV:34, ed. C. de La Rue, PG, XVI, Cols. 3, 3098; Κατά Κέλσου, 111:46, ed. P. Koetschau, GCS, II, 1899, p. 243. He could be referring, on the other hand, to the definition of Christianity by the Jews as a “heresy.”
10. Given... Basilius: Basilius served in 541 as the last consul of the Eastern part of the Empire. Later documents were dated by the number of the years subsequent to Basilius’ consulate. See F. Dolger & J. Karayannopulos, Byzantinische Urkundenlehre, 1: Die Kaiserurkunden, Munich 1968, p. 51.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
S. Halberschtam, “Two Responses with Notes,” Jeschurun, VI (1868), pp. 126-130 (in Hebrew); Juster, I, pp. 369-377; J. Mann, “Changes in the Divine Service of the Synagogue Due to Religious Persecution,” HUCA, IV (1927), pp. 253 n. 20, 268 n. 54, 279-282; Browe, pp. 126-127; P. E. Kahle, The Cairo Geniza, 2nd ed., Oxford 1959, pp. 39-42, 315-317; F. Schulz, in: Kahle (op. cit.), pp. 315317; V. Colorni, “L’uso del greco nella liturgia del giudaismo ellenistico e la Novella 146 di Giustiniano,” Annali di storia del diritto, XVIII (1964), pp. 19-80; Seyberlich, pp. 76-78; A. Μ. Rabello, Labeo, XII (1966), pp. 140-142; C. Mercha- via, The Church versus Talmudic and Midrashic Literature (500-1248), Jerusalem 1970, pp. 6-11, 445-446 (in Hebrew); A. Dotan, “The ‘Secret’ in the Synagogue Inscription of Ein-Gedi,” Leshonenu, XXXVI (1970/71), pp. 211-217 (in Hebrew); D. Barag, “HITIp in the Inscription from the Synagogue of Ein-Gedi,” Tarbiz, XLI (1972), pp. 453-454 (in Hebrew); K. Treu, “Die Bedeutung des Griechischen für die Juden im römischen Reich,” Kairos, XV (1973), pp. 135-136; S. Simonsohn, “The Hebrew Revival among Early Medieval European Jews,” 5. W. Baron Jubilee Volume, II, Jerusalem 1974, pp. 838-840; Avi-Yonah, pp. 249-250; Rabello, “Tribute,” pp. 225-226.
size=1 color=black face="Times New Roman">